alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO

EASTERN DIVISION

Board of Trustees, et al.,

Plaintiffs

 v.

Maurer Bros. Concrete Construction

LLC,

Defendant

:

:

:

:

:

:

Civil Action 2:12-cv-0296

Judge Marbley

Magistrate Judge Abel

ORDER

It appearing that Defendant has failed to answer or otherwise appear in this action

and that Defendant has been served with Interrogatories and Request for Production of

Documents and a Notice of Deposition in aid of execution and has failed to timely respond,

upon Motion of Plaintiffs, it is hereby ORDERED that, pursuant to Civil Rules 69 and 30,

Defendant Maurer Bros. Concrete Construction LLC, through an authorized officer, appear

and submit to oral examination at the offices of Steven L. Ball, 1010 Old Henderson Road,

Suite 1, Columbus, Ohio 43220, on a date and at such time as may be scheduled by Plaintiffs; and it is FURTHER ORDERED that Defendant respond to Plaintiffs’ Interrogatories

and Plaintiffs’ Request for Production of Documents, under oath, within fourteen (14) days

of this Order.

s/Mark R. Abel 

United States Magistrate Judge 

Case: 2:12-cv-00296-ALM-MRA Doc #: 11 Filed: 11/21/12 Page: 1 of 1 PAGEID #: <pageID>
Exhibit 32.2



Certification of Chief Financial Officer

of Tipperary Corporation Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350



In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Tipperary Corporation (the Company) for the period ended September 30, 2003, as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Joseph B. Feiten, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of my knowledge:



| | 1. | the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and
| | -- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | 2. | the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
| | -- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



/s/ Joseph B. FeitenName: Joseph B. Feiten Title: Chief Financial Officer Date: November 14, 2003




-1-
(Reap. Dec. 10248)

#### United States *v.*H. B. Moller, for a/c G. & R. Import Corp.

Entry Nos. J-1338; J-1385.

*651(Decided May 15, 1962)

*William JB. Orriolc, Jr.,*Assistant Attorney General, for tlie plaintiff.

Defendant not represented by counsel.

Rao, Judge:

The appeals for reappraisement listed above have been submitted for decision upon the following stipulation:

> IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by the undersigned, subject to the approval of the Court, that at the time of exportation of the merchandise involved in the above appeals for reappraisement such or similar merchandise was freely offered for sale pursuant to the provisions of Sec. 402a(d) of the Tariff Act of 1930 as amended by the Customs Simplification Act of 1956, at the invoiced values for each item in each appeal, FOB Hamburg, Germany, net, without any deductions, plus Americanization charges shown on letters dated Jan. 26, 1959.

> IT IS FURTHER AGREED that at said time there was no higher foreign value for such or similar merchandise.

> IT IS ALSO AGREED that these appeals are submitted for decision upon the foregoing stipulated facts.

Upon the agreed facts, I find export value, as defined in section 402a (d) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended by the Customs Simplification Act of 1956, to be the proper basis for the determination of the value of the merchandise covered by these appeals for reappraisement and that such values were the invoiced values for each item in each appeal, f.o.b. Hamburg, Germany, net, without any deductions, plus Americanization charges shown on letters, dated January 26,1959, which are attached to said invoices.

Judgment will be entered accordingly.
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 03-7895

JULIAN EDWARD ROCHESTER, Petitioner - Appellant, versus SCDC; HENRY DARGAN MCMASTER, Respondents - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Charleston. Henry M. Herlong, Jr., District Judge. (CA-03-2463-7-20AJ) Submitted: July 16, 2004 Decided: September 23, 2004 Before NIEMEYER, GREGORY, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Julian Edward Rochester, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).* By order entered April 5, 2004, this appeal was placed in abeyance for Jones v. Braxton , No. 03-6891. In view of our recent decision in Reid v. Angelone , 369 F.3d 363 (4th Cir. 2004), we no longer find it necessary to hold this case in abeyance for Jones . - 2 - PER CURIAM: Julian Edward Rochester, a state prisoner, seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000). * An appeal may not be taken from the final order in a § 2254 proceeding unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000). A certificate of appealability will not issue for claims addressed by a district court absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2000). A prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find both that his constitutional claims are debatable or wrong and that any dispositive procedural rulings by the district court are also debatable or wrong. See Miller-El v. Cockrell , 537 U.S. 322, 338 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel , 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); Rose v. Lee , 252 F.3d 676, 683 (4th Cir. 2001). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Rochester has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the- 3 - materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
Exhibit (31)-2
**SECTION 302 CERTIFICATION**
I, Richard D. Rodekohr, certify that:
1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of TranscontinentalGas Pipe Line Corporation; 2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untruestatement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessaryto make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under whichsuch statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report; 3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financialinformation included in this report, fairly present in all materialrespects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flowsof the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report; 4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible forestablishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (asdefined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)), for theregistrant and have:
 a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused suchdisclosure controls and procedures to be designed under oursupervision, to ensure that material information relating to theregistrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known tous by others within those entities, particularly during the period inwhich this report is being prepared;  b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosurecontrols and procedures and presented in this report our conclusionsabout the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, asof the end of the period covered by this report based on suchevaluation; and  c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internalcontrol over financial reporting that occurred during the periodcovered by the report that has materially affected, or is reasonablylikely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting; and
5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed,based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financialreporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee ofregistrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunctions):
 a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in thedesign or operation of internal control over financial reporting whichare reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’s ability torecord, process, summarize and report financial information; and  b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management orother employees who have a significant role in the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting.
Date: May 6, 2004   By: /s/ Richard D. Rodekohr  Richard D. Rodekohr Vice President and Treasurer (Principal Financial Officer)
REVOLVING
      LOAN AGREEMENT

     

    Date:
      November
      20, 2006

     

    Credit
      Limit: $6,255.00

                    

    RFG
      Acquisition I Inc., a Delaware corporation, promises to pay RICHARD F. BESTON,
      JR. (“Lender”), an individual, the sum of SIX THOUSAND, TWO HUNDRED FIFTY-FIVE
      and 00/100 DOLLARS ($6,255.00) (the “Credit Limit”) or such other principal
      amount that may be outstanding, in no case to exceed the Credit Limit, as
      evidenced by the books and records of Lender. Interest shall accrue at a rate
      of
      4.75% per annum and be calculated based on actual days outstanding and a 360
      day
      year. The outstanding principal and interest shall be paid upon the earlier
      of a
      completion of a merger or December 31, 2010. Lender hereby agrees to promptly
      extend funds to RFG Acquisition I Inc. as and when requested in a principal
      amount not to exceed the Credit Limit. 

     

    In
      the
      event of a default in the payment of any principal or interest, as herein
      provided, all sums due shall bear interest at a rate of ten percent (10.0%)
      per
      annum from the date then due until such payment is made. In the event of a
      default in the payment of principal or interest when due, the whole sum of
      principal and interest shall become immediately due and payable at the option
      of
      the Lender. The waiver of any right or rights granted to RFG Acquisition I
      Inc.
      shall not be deemed to be a continuing waiver of such right or rights. All
      such
      waivers shall be in writing. Principal and interest shall be payable in US
      dollars. If any legal or collection action is instituted on this Revolving
      Loan
      Agreement, RFG Acquisition I Inc. promises to pay such sum as the court may
      fix
      as attorney's fees and costs.

     

    RFG
      Acquisition I Inc.

     

    
      	 	 	 	 	 
	By:	/s/
              David W.
              Matre	 	 	Date:
              November 20,
              2006
	 	
              

              David
                W. Matre

            	 	 	
            
	 	
              Chief
                Financial Officer  

            	 	 	
            


    

     

    “Lender”

     

    
      	 	 	 	 
	/s/
              Richard F.
              Beston, Jr .	 	 	Date:
              November 20,
              2006
	
              

              RICHARD
                F. BESTON, JR., an individual

            	 	 	
            


    

    


    DO
      NOT DESTROY THIS ORIGINAL AGREEMENT
Exhibit 32.1 CERTIFICATION OF CEO PURSUANT TO
18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 In connection
with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Trinity Capital Corporation, a New
Mexico corporation ( Trinity), for the period ended June 30, 2007 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report),
William C. Enloe, as President and Chief Executive Officer of
Trinity, hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the
best of my knowledge: (1)
The Report
  fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
  Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and(2)
The information
  contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the
  financial condition and results of operations of Trinity.  /s/ William
  C. EnloeWilliam C.
  EnloePresident
  and Chief Executive OfficerAugust 9,
  2007 33
Case No. 15,201.

#### UNITED STATES v. The GEORGE M. BAIN.

[See Case No. 14.496.]
Case: 2:12-cv-00276-EAS-MRA Doc #: 19 Filed: 09/05/13 Page: 1 of 1  PAGEID #: <pageID>

    -       - Superintendent of Documents
      - 2015-05-11T10:05:38-0400
      - US GPO, Washington, DC 20401
      - Superintendent of Documents
      - GPO attests that this document has not been altered since it was disseminated by GPO
# C_2008140EN.01001601.xml

| 6.6.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 140/16 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

6.6.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 140/16

---

Euro exchange rates (1)

1

5 June 2008

(2008/C 140/11)

1 euro=

1 euro

| | Currency | Exchange rate |
| --- | --- | --- |
| USD | US dollar | 1,5402 |
| JPY | Japanese yen | 163,46 |
| DKK | Danish krone | 7,4589 |
| GBP | Pound sterling | 0,7897 |
| SEK | Swedish krona | 9,3118 |
| CHF | Swiss franc | 1,6147 |
| ISK | Iceland króna | 118,72 |
| NOK | Norwegian krone | 7,968 |
| BGN | Bulgarian lev | 1,9558 |
| CZK | Czech koruna | 24,57 |
| EEK | Estonian kroon | 15,6466 |
| HUF | Hungarian forint | 241,86 |
| LTL | Lithuanian litas | 3,4528 |
| LVL | Latvian lats | 0,7009 |
| PLN | Polish zloty | 3,377 |
| RON | Romanian leu | 3,6229 |
| SKK | Slovak koruna | 30,325 |
| TRY | Turkish lira | 1,89 |
| AUD | Australian dollar | 1,6169 |
| CAD | Canadian dollar | 1,5727 |
| HKD | Hong Kong dollar | 12,0271 |
| NZD | New Zealand dollar | 2,0168 |
| SGD | Singapore dollar | 2,1103 |
| KRW | South Korean won | 1 581,02 |
| ZAR | South African rand | 12,0391 |
| CNY | Chinese yuan renminbi | 10,699 |
| HRK | Croatian kuna | 7,2506 |
| IDR | Indonesian rupiah | 14 331,56 |
| MYR | Malaysian ringgit | 5,0172 |
| PHP | Philippine peso | 67,915 |
| RUB | Russian rouble | 36,7125 |
| THB | Thai baht | 50,688 |
| BRL | Brazilian real | 2,5048 |
| MXN | Mexican peso | 15,8795 |

Currency

Exchange rate

USD

US dollar

1,5402

JPY

Japanese yen

163,46

DKK

Danish krone

7,4589

GBP

Pound sterling

0,7897

SEK

Swedish krona

9,3118

CHF

Swiss franc

1,6147

ISK

Iceland króna

118,72

NOK

Norwegian krone

7,968

BGN

Bulgarian lev

1,9558

CZK

Czech koruna

24,57

EEK

Estonian kroon

15,6466

HUF

Hungarian forint

241,86

LTL

Lithuanian litas

3,4528

LVL

Latvian lats

0,7009

PLN

Polish zloty

3,377

RON

Romanian leu

3,6229

SKK

Slovak koruna

30,325

TRY

Turkish lira

1,89

AUD

Australian dollar

1,6169

CAD

Canadian dollar

1,5727

HKD

Hong Kong dollar

12,0271

NZD

New Zealand dollar

2,0168

SGD

Singapore dollar

2,1103

KRW

South Korean won

1 581,02

ZAR

South African rand

12,0391

CNY

Chinese yuan renminbi

10,699

HRK

Croatian kuna

7,2506

IDR

Indonesian rupiah

14 331,56

MYR

Malaysian ringgit

5,0172

PHP

Philippine peso

67,915

RUB

Russian rouble

36,7125

THB

Thai baht

50,688

BRL

Brazilian real

2,5048

MXN

Mexican peso

15,8795

---

(1)

1

Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.

Source:

---
**Exhibit 31.1**

 

**Certificationof CEO Pursuant to Securities Exchange Act**

**Rules 13a-14and 15d-14 as Adopted Pursuant to**

**Section 302of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002**

 

I,Jay S. Maltby, certify that:

 

1.             I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Qof Cruzan International, Inc.;

 

2.             Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain anyuntrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessaryto make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which suchstatements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by thisreport;

 

3.             Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, andother financial information included in this report, fairly present in allmaterial respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flowsof the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

 

4.             The registrant’s other certifying officer and I areresponsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures(as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for theregistrant and have:

 

(a)          Designed such disclosure controls andprocedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designedunder our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to theregistrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us byothers within those entities, particularly during the period in which thisreport is being prepared;

 

(b)          Evaluated the effectiveness of theregistrant’s disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this reportour conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls andprocedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on suchevaluation; and

 

(c)          Disclosed in this report any change inthe registrant’s internal control over financial reporting that occurred duringthe registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or isreasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting; and

 

5.             The registrant’s other certifying officer and I havedisclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control overfinancial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee ofthe registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunctions):

 

(a)          All significant deficiencies andmaterial weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control overfinancial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect theregistrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financialinformation; and

 

(b)          Any fraud, whether or not material,that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting.

 

Date:February 13, 2006

 
|   | /s/ Jay S. Maltby                     |   |
|--------|---------------------------------------|--------|
|   | Jay S. Maltby                         |
|   | Chief Executive Officer and President |

 

1

----
**EXHIBIT 31.1****CERTIFICATIONS**I, Robert L.G. White, certify that:     1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of TransTechnology Corporation;     2. Based on my knowledge, this quarterly report does not contain any untrue statement of amaterial fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light ofthe circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this quarterly report;     3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information includedin this quarterly report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, resultsof operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in thisquarterly report;     4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) for the registrant and we have:          (a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls andprocedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating tothe registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within thoseentities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;          (b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls andprocedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and          (c) disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourthfiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonablylikely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and     5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the auditcommittee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent function):          (a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect theregistrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and          (b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have asignificant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.   Date: February 7, 2006 /s/ Robert L. G. White     Robert L. G. White  President & Chief Executive Officer
## United States Court of Appeals **For the Eighth Circuit**

___________________________
No. 20

- 2973

___________________________
United States of America

Plaintiff - Appellee

v.

Omar Acosta

- Ruiz

Defendant - Appellant

____________ Appeal from United States District Court for the Northern District of Iowa - Cedar Rapids

____________

Submitted: March 3 , 2021 Filed: March 8, 2021

[Unpublished]

____________ Before BENTON, MELLOY, and KELLY, Circuit Judges.

____________

PER CURIAM.-2- Omar Acosta

- Ruiz appeals the within

- Guidelines sentence the district court 1 imposed after he pled guilty to illegal reentry. Having jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, this c ourt affirms.

Counsel has moved for leave to withdraw, and has filed a brief under Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967), arguing that the sentence is substantively unreasonable. Upon careful review, this court concludes that the district court did not impose an unreasonable sentence because the record reflects that it properly considered the factors set forth in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a). See United States v.
Feemster , 572 F.3d 455, 461

- 62, 464 (8th Cir. 2009) (en banc) (appellate court first ensures no significant procedural error occurred, then considers substantive
reasonableness of sentence under deferential abuse

- of

- discretion standard; abuse of discretion occurs when court fails to consider relevant factor, gives significant weight to improper or ir relevant factor, or commits clear error of judgment in weighing appropriate factor); United States v. Stults , 575 F.3d 834, 849 (8th Cir. 2009) (where court makes individualized assessment based on facts presented, addressing defendant’s proffered informat ion in consideration of § 3553(a) factors, sentence is not unreasonable). The court has independently reviewed the record
under Penson v. Ohio , 488 U.S. 75 (1988), and finds no nonfrivolous issues for appeal.

The judgment is affirmed. Counsel’s motion to withdraw is granted.

______________________________

1 The Honorable C.J. Williams, United States District Judge for the Northern District of Iowa.